RealGM

Not sure I'd agree, but here's Ian Thompson's quote:

It's shaping up to be a four-player draft, followed by several murkier picks based on long-term potential.

Link.

Randolph is a guy you don't see mentioned a lot around here.

He has Gallinari (#3) much higher than Ford/DX...probably because Thomsen thinks he's an "excellent" athlete while most others think he's only average in that respect.

From what I've seen, he's not an excellent athlete, at least vertically. He does seem to have pretty good footspeed but it's only really evident when he's handling the ball, kind of like what you might say about Steve Nash. Quick enough to seem really quick with good footwork.

I haven't been impressed by Randolph. But, hey, all the better if he goes before we pick.

emunney wrote:From what I've seen, he's not an excellent athlete, at least vertically. He does seem to have pretty good footspeed but it's only really evident when he's handling the ball, kind of like what you might say about Steve Nash. Quick enough to seem really quick with good footwork.

It's an important distinction.

Looks like he has great ballhandling ability for his size, which can allow him to overcome a lack of pure athleticism in terms of his first step and ability to get to the hoop. But he definitely doesn't have the sort of explosiveness you see from most forwards in the lottery.

fam3381 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



It's an important distinction.

Looks like he has great ballhandling ability for his size, which can allow him to overcome a lack of pure athleticism in terms of his first step and ability to get to the hoop. But he definitely doesn't have the sort of explosiveness you see from most forwards in the lottery.

True, but most SFs at 6'9" don't have the perimeter skills, handle or shooting ability either.

I'm starting to thing the best player in this draft won't even be picked in the top 10 - Kevin Love.

You don't think Love will go top 10?

DrugBust wrote:True, but most SFs at 6'9" don't have the perimeter skills, handle or shooting ability either.

I don't know if this year is an aberration, but he hasn't shot the ball well...420 fg/.318 3fg. Maybe that's from trying to do too much as the team's main offensive weapon.

I guess in the draft it always makes me nervous to draft guys without good athleticism because that's one thing you can't teach. Not that ballhandling is easy to learn in your 20s, but still. A lack of athleticism limits pretty much all phases of your game...offense, defense, rebounding.

Is it time to start photoshopping Gallinari jerseys yet?

emunney wrote:You don't think Love will go top 10?

My worry with Love is when he's around the hoop he's laying in buckets that every other player in the NBA is dunking. He's the most fundamental basketball player I've seen and I love that, but I think the lack of athleticism is going to kill him.

DrugBust wrote:My worry with Love is when he's around the hoop he's laying in buckets that every other player in the NBA is dunking. He's the most fundamental basketball player I've seen and I love that, but I think the lack of athleticism is going to kill him.

That's pretty much it in a nutshell. "Below the rim" is a phrase you hate to hear attached to a guy who plays center in college and is probably only 6-9. But as you said, his skillset is so rare for a big. He doesn't look like he's in very good shape...big but kinda soft looking.

Ruzious wrote:I'm starting to thing the best player in this draft won't even be picked in the top 10 - Kevin Love.

You really think Love is better than Michael Beasley?

Love is solid, but I think a 6'8" 260 LB PF that isn't overly athletic will have problems in the NBA.

fam3381 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



That's pretty much it in a nutshell. "Below the rim" is a phrase you hate to hear attached to a guy who plays center in college and is probably only 6-9. But as you said, his skillset is so rare for a big. He doesn't look like he's in very good shape...big but kinda soft looking.

Yup. If you put those same skills in a guy with same height but with just good athleticism you would probably have the #1 pick.

I see a lot of Sean May in him, though Love appears to be a bit taller.

DrugBust wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Yup. If you put those same skills in a guy with same height but with just good athleticism you would probably have the #1 pick.

I see a lot of Sean May in him, though Love appears to be a bit taller.

He's got the same inside game that May had, but he does a lot more things that May did. He's got 3 point range. He's the best outlet passer I've seen since Wes Unseld. Too bad UCLA doesn't run more to take advantage of that - especially when they have 2 guards who can fly. He can even handle the ball pretty well. And I love the way he reacts - there's no hesitation in him - he just knows what to do. Honestly, I'd rate Beasley ahead of Love (like everyone else would) - but I don't think I've ever seen 2 big forwards who combined efficiency and productivity at such a young age before. I think Love will measure a hair over 6'9 with shoes - tall enough to defend PFs. Just have a good defensive C play next to him.

I was actually a May fan. He was grossly overweight as a frosh and gradually got in good enough shape to be a reasonably high 1st... oh and win an NCAA Championship. Too bad his knees haven't let him show if he could play in the NBA.

DB...you were right about Love's athleticism or lack of it compared to David Lee as I've watched more UCLA games here the last two weeks.

Still, his IQ is off the charts. Seems to me like Love is a 50-50 bet with no middle ground. He'll either be an outstanding player or a complete bust due to lack of athleticism.

The positive side of him is that he is big enough that he'll be harder to root out of the post, but I'm not sure he has the quickness to snare those rebounds against NBA competition.

In regards to passing, Love is far superior to Bogut and here's why. Love can make the outlet pass. The outlet pass is what destroys the other team's defense. For all of Bogut's hyped skills, he's not good at the outlet. Bogut is far too mechanical in getting his defensive rebounds and afraid he'll get stripped. Love just grabs that board and fires downcourt......that is a huge weapon. I thought we'd get that with Bogut but didn't

Love is great at reading the angles on the glass and snatches everything in his area with both hands. I have zero doubt about his rebounding ability translating.

emunney wrote:Love is great at reading the angles on the glass and snatches everything in his area with both hands. I have zero doubt about his rebounding ability translating.

If we have a pick in the 7-10 range, I have no problem taking Love....but the problem is then where does he play and what do you do with Yi?

And that still doesn't address the now really serious issues we'd have with speed and athleticism on the team given we'd have Bogut and Love----two really good players, but not pure athletes.

I don't think he's a very good fit with us. I'm extremely ambivalent about this draft. There are a lot of guys with a lot of different things to offer, but none approach what you'd call "perfect." All in all, though, I'd rather have pure basketball players than pure athletes, and Love fits the bill of the former. When you look at Love's all-around game, apart from maybe defensive agility, how much is there that you can't love? He shoots, he rebounds, he passes, he draws a ton of fouls and hits his free throws... the guy is an absolute monster of productivity -- he's arguably better as a freshman than Bogut was as a sophomore, and he plays in a better conference. I have a hard time looking the other way on a guy like him, bad fit or not. Besides, if we trade CV, we'll have minutes for him. We definitely need another rebounder, and he could be the best in college ball. I have him 4th after Beasley, Rose and Mayo.

Maybe I'll regret that, but I'll just chalk it up to being a sucker for guys who produce like crazy on very successful teams.

Actually, my biggest worry about Love is his weight.

So the bucks are getting the fifth pick to use on a murkier pick then.